39. Latest

Wholly unresponsive. Which means, I suppose, that Atypical Liberal agrees with me. And the purposes of boats and campers is not "killing people", which is the sole purpose of automatic weapons.

It's quite responsive.

No, it is not. You were responding to a question about civilian ownership of automatic weapons, and you failed to address this even indirectly. So is there a civilian use for automatic weapons? If so, what is it?

You want to justify firearm ownership through need. In this country, we don't have to justify the things we choose to buy.

Since, as you admit, "firearms are for killing," there is a difference in kind, and not just in degree, about ownership of a camper or a boat, and ownership of a firearm.

Yes, firearms are for killing, and yes, that is what the second amendment is about.

You seem to be saying that the Second Amendment allows killing people. Is that what you really mean?

Yes, but the whole point of the second amendment is to put military-grade small arms in the hands of civilians so that they can function as military forces and counter military force.

That has got to be the biggest lump of shit that I've come across since a conservative told me that Obama was simultaneously a marxist, a fascist and an anarchist. Saddam Hussain was generally disliked by most of his people, yet gun ownership was high. Why did he seem not to care that his people were armed? Because he had an army and an air force to back him up. A few yahoos in the sticks aren't going to stop the US Army for more than 2 minutes should they decide to take control of the nation.

I think this conversation is done. I said that you were a gun nut, and you proved it. Since I am an intelligent human being, we have nothing to say to each other.